Like this:

Why do galaxies spin at a uniform rate from the centers to the outside edges?

I received this question from a reader of Application of Impossible Things. It’s not the sort of question I usually get from readers – what the hell, I like to try new things. I asked “my people” about it (whether those people are guides, or aspects of me – does it matter?). I’m not sure that they answered the question, but I’m not really qualified to judge since I don’t know much about the subject. I thought it might be fun to see what sort of feedback people have about what information I did receive. Feel free to comment below …

Answer:

First we would say that what you perceive when perceiving a galaxy is a particular viewpoint. That viewpoint from within time/space gives a distorted view of the reality of what a galaxy is, for you have trained yourselves to see one aspect (or many aspects, but not enough) of it, while missing other aspects altogether. We remind you that it is said that when Spanish ships approached the shores of the new world, many of the natives did not see the ships. The ships were invisible not because they didn’t exist, but because in being outside the reasoned perceptions of the viewers, the accustomed trails of perception, the ships were edited out by the manager, the brain, the mind. The mind made them invisible by editing focus.

So too we would like to suggest that aspects of the galaxies, or of space, are edited out for the purposes of maintaining a coherent flow within the mind. Now we will invite you to step outside that sphere of the familiar into what is for you unknown territory.

The string of time that is inhabited currently by the human population could be said to include a certain plane of space. Were you to expand your concepts of time, concepts of space would also necessarily be understood to expand because they are actually not two concepts, they are one. This is not to say that time/space expand in ways that have been postulated, but that there must be a new paradigm to understand that which is questioned.

There is an additional energy to be identified, in one sense (while in another it is all one energy – we will remind you, then set that aside for the sake of this discussion so that we do not confuse the issue for now). The qualities of this unidentified energy have already been confined, in concept, by current science, within a band that does not allow for depth.

We see you hesitate, for depth is one of the three dimensions. You must now enter physics, which we understand you have little knowledge of.

Let us say that a plane has three dimensions, for nothing can ever be of no thickness. As soon as something has two dimensions in space, it has three. That is how we describe how you currently view time/space.

Imagine now a plane with a MEASURABLE depth. Now you may liken that to the depth of physics.

Now imagine a plane with depth, width and breadth, and also inside out, and between inside out, and mirroring itself, and mirroring betweens, and on and on – infinite insides and outsides and betweens. From this viewpoint you will begin to see that you perceive what you think time/space is, but you see only the elephant’s tail. We will say that this might be the equivalent of quantum physics for the sake of this discussion (although it actually is not – they are not as deep as they appear to be. They probe, though, and draw closer to a new paradigm.)

So let us leap now. When you perceive only a fraction of that which truly exists, your viewpoint and conclusions will be incomplete. Does a galaxy spin at the same rate on the interior as it does at the edges? Yes, from your point of view it appears to do so. Does the pinwheel appear to be a solid object when it spins in the wind? Yes, although your memory tells you that this is not so. You have lost your memories of Full Time/Space, so you have lost the ability to see that from another viewpoint the galaxy does not appear to spin evenly in speed, inside to edge. It is a more complex movement containing not only the galaxy but much beyond and between.

Another way to think of it would be to say that everything else is spinning, and the galaxy is stationary.

Or imagine the whole of creation were spinning slowly, and one galaxy were the center of the spin. From the view of the whole of creation, that point, far smaller than the smallest particle, would not appear to be spinning at different rates, inside to out. It would be such an infinitely small difference from the inside to the edge, it would not be discernible at all. (Physicists will not accept this, literal as they are. We invite them to think in terms of the questions being presented, or the idea of the model being presented, not the particular example.)

What if you perceive from between the two viewpoints, but you think that you perceive from one: the physical world? What if, as you currently read space, you are not looking at time as is currently understood, but time as it could be, as it was, as it might be?

What if your observation has changed it? We assure you that your observations, your expectations and thoughts surrounding the stars and planets and solar systems and galaxies are affecting the bodies in space. Please think this over and we’ll keep moving….

Say that you are looking at a galaxy from your viewpoint, seeing what you think is true: the insides and edges of the galaxy are moving at the same rate of speed through space. Your assumption is that space and time are fixed and universally measurable. What if, in fact, time/space contain bends and movements of their own? What if those bends and movements are both independent, and responding to the observer (be that observer a single consciousness or a collective consciousness)? What if time speeds up here, and slows there? What if space also bends, speeds and slows, having its own movements? Galaxies might then appear to be moving oddly within comparison to the rules you have found on earth, for the universe is not constant as assumed.

We offer this idea.

There are many energies that have not been identified. Or none. As we specified, all energy is, at source, one energy. Within the model of making distinctions between the properties of aspects of the single energy, say making a distinction between gravity and electricity and magnetics, then we can address your question. There are in fact aspects of the energy that have not been described and categorized. Depending upon how the distinctions are made, there may be a few or quite a few that could be said to have been, as yet, “undiscovered.” They have in fact been discovered and to some extent explored, although they are not recognized by scientific investigators.

Let us address Dark Matter, which the reader has proposed or introduced. Dark Matter is a nebulous concept that science has postulated. It is not yet described in a way that will clearly separate it from other energies (aspects) that are also available. Let us say that Dark Matter is the soup that could be more useful to science were it further split into carrots, beans, and potatoes. Or when the soup is made into a consommé, so that all ingredients are understood to be throughout the “energy” called Dark Matter. One of these paths will be chosen within ten years or so, and followed to greater knowledge. It matters not which is chosen, for either will lead to the same understanding and conceptualization necessary to understand the perceived actions or movements of galaxies.

My conscious mind: Will dark matter explain the apparent aberrant behavior of the spinning of galaxies?

Let us say that in the course of investigating Dark Matter, the information needed to gain an understanding of the apparent movement of galaxies will be found.